Nicola Nasser: Israeli Factor in Syrian Conflict Unveiled

More than two and a half years on, Israel’s purported neutrality in the
Syrian conflict and the United
State’s fanfare rhetoric urging a “regime change” in Damascus were
abruptly cut short to unveil that the Israeli factor has been all
throughout the conflict the main concern of both countries.

All their media and political focus on “democracy versus dictatorship”
and on the intervention of the international community on the basis of a
“responsibility to protect” to avert the exacerbating “humanitarian
crisis” in Syria was merely a focus intended to divert the attention of
the world public opinion away from their real goal, i.e. to safeguard
the security of Israel.

Their “Plan A” was to enforce a change in the Syrian regime as their
“big prize” and replace it by another less threatening and more willing
to strike a
“peace deal” with Israel and in case of failure, which is the case as
developed now, their
“Plan B” was to pursue a “lesser prize” by disarming Syria of its
chemical weapons to deprive it of its strategic defensive deterrence
against the Israeli overwhelming arsenal of nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons of mass destruction. Their
“Plan A” proved a failure, but their “Plan B” was a success.

However, the fact that the Syrian humanitarian crisis continues unabated
with the raging non
– stop fighting while the United States is gradually coming to terms
with Syria’s major allies in Russia and Iran as a prelude to recognizing
the
“legitimacy” of the status quo in Syria is a fact that shutters whatever
remains of U.S. credibility in the conflict.

President Barak Obama, addressing the UN General Assembly on last
September 24, had this justification:
“Let us remember that this is not a zero-sum endeavor. We are no longer
in a Cold War.
There’s no Great Game to be won, nor does America have any interest in
Syria beyond the well-being of its people, the stability of its
neighbors, the elimination of chemical weapons, and ensuring it does not
become a safe-haven for terrorists. I welcome the influence of all
nations that can help bring about a peaceful
resolution.”

This U – turn shift by the U.S. dispels any remaining doubts that the
U.S. ever cared about the Syrian people and what Obama called their
“well being.”

The U.S. pronounced commitment to a “political solution” through
co-sponsoring with Russia the convening of a
“Geneva – 2” conference is compromised by its purported inability to
unite even the
“opposition” that was created and sponsored by the U.S. itself and the
“friends of
Syria” it leads and to rein in the continued fueling of the armed
conflict with arms, money and logistics by its regional Turkish and Gulf
Arabs allies, which undermines any political solution and render the
very convening of a
“Geneva – 2” conference a guess of anybody.

Meanwhile, Israel’s neutrality was shuttered by none other than its President Shimon Peres.

Speaking at the 40th commemoration of some three thousand Israeli
soldiers who were killed in the 1973 war with Syria and Egypt, Peres
revealed unarguably that his state has been the major beneficiary of the
Syrian conflict.

Peres said: “Today” the Syrian President Basher al-Assad “is punished for his refusal to
compromise” with Israel and “the Syrian people pay for it.”